-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature/arkode sts #541
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Feature/arkode sts #541
Conversation
Unfortunately, the rebase to |
12940d0
to
62bccbd
Compare
Yeah, I think in the future we should not rebase develop on main (if main is updated directly) and instead do a merge. I don't see a real advantage to having the same linear history for main and develop, and it seems the rebase has a pretty big downside. |
Indeed. Although rebasing might be no big deal for branches with 1-2 commits, it is a huge waste of time for a branch with any appreciable amount of development. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still need to look at the changes in src/arkode
, but I wanted to share my comments so far.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One more set of comments, covering the rest of this draft PR.
I believe that all conversations have now been resolved. The only remaining item to do in the code is to adjust how the number of RHS evaluations is retrieved by the user (addressed in PR #587). Whichever of the two PRs is merged second will need to be updated slightly. I'll request "re-review" by everyone so folks can verify that their concerns have been resolved. |
All comments appear to be resolved, so I'm dismissing this stale review.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One minor error, but otherwise I think this looks good.
@@ -2992,6 +3002,10 @@ int arkCheckConvergence(ARKodeMem ark_mem, int* nflagPtr, int* ncfPtr) | |||
ARKodeHAdaptMem hadapt_mem; | |||
|
|||
if (*nflagPtr == ARK_SUCCESS) { return (ARK_SUCCESS); } | |||
/* Returns with an ARK_RETRY_STEP flag happen in a step much |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do not understand what this comment is saying. Can you clarify?
This is a draft PR for feedback on new STS module.